Appeal 6001221

The appeal is allowed and planning permission is granted for change of use from a C3 to a C2 property, at [site address] , Doncaster, [postcode] , in accordance with the terms of the application, Ref 25/00637/COU, subject to the following conditions:

The development hereby permitted shall begin not later than three years from the date of this decision.

The property shall be used only as a children’s home, to be occupied by a maximum of four children at a time and their carers, and for no other use falling within class C2 of the Town and Country Planning ([name]) Order 1987 or any amendment to it. The property may revert back to a C3 dwelling without the need for planning permission.

Neither the application form nor the plans I have been provided with propose the creation of a new vehicular access crossing over the pavement, parking in the garden to the front of the property or any proposed works within the public highway. [address] is a classified highway, planning permission would be required for such works. I have dealt with the appeal on the basis that it seeks planning permission for change of use only. It would be open to the appellant to submit a separate application for a new access from [address] in the future should they wish to do so.

The main issue is the effect of the proposed use on the quality and safety of the area having regard to on street parking.

The appeal property is situated in a predominantly residential area with a youth centre, college building and primary school nearby, on the opposite side of [address]. Unrestricted on street parking is available along [address], to the front of the houses, in a dedicated parking lane, which does not disrupt the two-way flow of traffic. The houses also have parking spaces and garages in rear gardens, accessed via a well-maintained lane with street lighting and inset block paved bays, used for parking or as passing places. Front driveways or parking on front gardens is not a feature of the area. Houses and flats on the opposite side of [address] have car parking to the rear. The youth centre, college and school have separate access roads and parking, all of which had spaces available at the time of my visit, after 9am during term time. There was also plenty of on street parking space available along [address] at the time of my visit.

There is space to park a single car on the street directly in front of the appeal property, despite the presence of an island build out, which is designed to keep the adjacent access road and visibility from it clear. There is an existing prefabricated garage to the rear of the dwelling, which could be used for parking or removed to create an uncovered parking space with easier access. Should additional off-street parking be required, this could be provided adjacent to the garage or adjacent to the lane, by insetting the rear boundary to create a parking bay, which is a common arrangement along these back lanes. This would only take up a small part of the good-sized rear garden and there is no information before me to suggest that this could not be done without planning permission.

It is proposed to change the use of the existing end of terrace family home to a children’s home for up to four children aged between 8 and 17 years old. The existing floor plans show three first floor bedrooms and a study, which could be used as a fourth bedroom. The proposed plans show three ensuite bedrooms and an office at first floor level, and a fourth ensuite bedroom on the ground floor. The remainder of the ground floor would comprise shared kitchen and lounge space, together with storage and a WC.

In addition to the children living in the home, who would be under 18 years old and highly unlikely to own a car, there would be two non-resident support workers present at all times. Other support workers may visit the property as and when necessary, for example social workers and staff to cover breaks. However, these would be visitors as opposed to permanent onsite staff. At shift change over times there could potentially be four staff present with cars for a short overlapping period of time. Occasionally there may be cleaners, maintenance workers, deliveries or vehicles picking up or dropping off children attending schools or activities elsewhere. All of these are things that could occur at a normal family home, where parents and adult children may each have a car and visitors, occupiers may have daily visits from carers, help with cleaning and maintenance, receive shopping and other deliveries and may have children that are picked up and dropped off before and after school or visits to friends and other places.

The area is well served by services and facilities that the staff and children are likely to require and there is a bus stop very close by. Depending upon where staff live, they may be able to get to work at the site on foot, by bicycle or by public transport, or they may car share or be dropped off and picked up. Even if staff cars are required to take the children to different places, the existing garage space and on street parking available directly in front of the house and nearby would be sufficient to cater for this. Given the existing parking arrangements in the area, it is unclear how any additional modest on street parking demand would be detrimental to the quality or safety of the neighbourhood.

The parking standards set out in Appendix 6 of the Doncaster Local Plan (2021) (the local plan) recommend 1 space per 2 staff, plus 1 space per 3 daily visitors for C2 residential institutions outside of Doncaster Town Centre. The recommended standard for C3 dwellings with 2+ bedrooms is 2 allocated spaces per dwelling plus 1 unallocated visitor space per 4 dwellings, provided in defined bays on the public highway or private drive. Therefore, the onsite parking requirement for the proposed use, which would have only two permanent staff members on site at a time, plus visitors attending at different times to cover short breaks, attend meetings, or to provide occasional short-term services such as cleaning and maintenance, is no greater than the parking requirement of the existing use, which is not met. Visits to the site would take place at different times and would not generate significant parking demand throughout the daytime or on evenings.

The local highway authority raised concerns about parking to the front of the dwelling and the potential removal of the traffic island, but this is not part of the proposal before me. There is no substantive evidence before me to suggest that there is a shortage of parking in the area or that the change of use would result in such a level of increased parking in the area, over and above that which could be generated by the existing four bedroom family home, that it would be detrimental to highway safety.

I therefore conclude that any modest increase in parking and traffic that may be generated by the use would not be detrimental to highway safety or to the quality of the neighbourhood area. Accordingly, I find no conflict with Policies 13, 42 and 46 of the local plan, Policy S1 of the Stainforth Neighbourhood Plan or paragraphs 109, 115 and 116 of the National Planning Policy Framework, which collectively seek amongst other things to ensure new development incorporates the qualities of a successful place, including appropriate parking provision, and is not detrimental to highway safety.

In addition to the standard time limit, a condition to limit the C2 use to a children’s home only, and to limit the maximum number of children occupying the home at one time, is reasonable and necessary to ensure that the comings and goings and parking demands remain commensurate with the size of the property and other family homes in the immediate area. A plans condition is not necessary as no external changes to the property requiring planning permission are proposed.

For the reasons given above, the appeal is allowed.